ArticleJournal of sports science & medicine2025
Effects of Foam Roller, and Massage Ball with and Without Vibration on Squat Load-Velocity Profile of Resistance Trained Adults.
Article in Journal of sports science & medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Self-massage tools such as foam rollers and massage balls are widely used in warm-ups and recovery, but their effects on dynamic strength tasks like squatting remain unclear. To compare the effects of a foam roller (FR), massage ball (MB), and vibrating massage ball (MBV) versus a control condition on squat load velocity profiles and associated electromyographic (EMG) activity in resistance-trained individuals. In this crossover study, fourteen experienced resistance-trained participants performed four experimental conditions: FR, MB, MBV, and control. After an initial session for incremental load testing and protocol familiarization, each participant performed eight back squats before and after each experimental session, while movement velocity, hip vertical displacement (range of motion), and EMG of the vastus lateralis and semimembranosus were recorded. MBV produced a significant increase in quadriceps EMG during the fastest repetition (β = 0.107; p = 0.003). In contrast, all interventions elicited a reduction in the second fastest repetition versus control (FR: β = -0.033, p = 0.005; MB: β = -0.025, p = 0.029; MBV: β = -0.036, p = 0.002). Moreover, both FR and MBV similarly decreased third fastest repetition and mean velocities relative to control (FR: third fastest repetition β = -0.025, p = 0.027; mean β = -0.046, p = 0.046; MBV: third fastest repetition β = -0.032, p = 0.005; mean velocity β = -0.031, p = 0.004). There were no significant changes in the hip vertical displacement. All self-massage conditions modestly impaired squat velocity, with the MB showing the least detrimental effect on performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.